CEOs Step into the Fray

View more from the

Once upon a time, CEOs steered away from political controversy. Who could blame them? Weighing in on divisive topics could alienate as many potential customers as it might win over. That’s not to say that corporate leaders were apolitical. They and their organizations have long been active in the process—supporting PACs and lobbying to shape rules and regulations that directly affect their businesses.

Now all bets are off. Social upheaval and government paralysis, particularly in the United States, are spurring CEOs to speak out on an array of contentious subjects. Such leaders as Tim Cook of Apple, Marc Benioff of Salesforce, and Kenneth Frazier of Merck have advocated for causes that aren’t obviously related to their companies. Among the issues they’re taking on: LGBTQ rights, immigration, racism, and the environment. As Ronnie Chatterji of Duke’s Fuqua School of Business and Mike Toffel of Harvard Business School note in “The New CEO Activists,” this newfound boldness is often born of personal conviction.

But some CEOs, say Chatterji and Toffel, also are joining the debate because the changing business climate demands it of them. Today their shareholders, employees, partners, and customers expect them to take a stand. Though it’s hard to tease the strands of motivation apart, what’s clear is that as more CEOs assert their views, more will be emboldened to follow. In addition, the failure to speak out on divisive questions can now be viewed as its own kind of statement and provocation. As Chatterji and Toffel argue, “Increasingly, CEO activism has strategic implications: In the Twitter age, silence is more conspicuous—and more consequential.” For corporate leaders, being apolitical may soon be impolitic.